ner
on
our
362
sources.
:
We
а
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
River, is that a beacon on Bunansiah reef is practically of no use at all. If money is going to be spent on erecting a beacon, what they want is a beacon that will enable then to navigate the Capsuimun Pass. Several years ago a letter merchant cap- was signed by fifty senior tains asking that a beacon should be erected at the southern end of Capsing Island. I trust before your Excellency proceeds further with this matter that it will receive your thorough consideration. I think it will be waste of money to erect a light on that reef when it is required at Capsing Island more than anywhere else.
ment. Of course, the erection of these two stations is not of particular value unless the Hongkong Government erect a wireless telegra- phic station or permits others to do so. I do not believe myself such a station run as a com- mercial undertaking could possibly pay for two or three years, but it is absolutely necessary that we should have one, as year by year a considerable number of steamers are being fitted with wireless telegraphy. How it is to be erected, either by government or commercial undertaking, is a matter that will come up for consideration later on. I know it has been before your Excellency already, and I am sure it will not fail to receive your attention. Your Excellency also referred to the military contribution and stated that the Secretary of State proposed to appoint a committee to inquire into the matter. The unofficial members entirely agree that the whole Cony should contribute something towards the defence of the Empire, but we consider that improvement might be made in the man- in which the collection is levied the Colony, and welcome the proposal of the Secretary of Stato to appoint a committee. I do not propose to go deeper into the matter. My views are well known, and after two years' personal consider- ation I see no reason to modify what I said at this Council two
years ago; but I will taka this opportunity of point- ing out how extremely heavily this military, tax presses upon the ratepayers of Hongkong. You told as in your speech in sub- mitting the Estimates that the import duties were expected to realise $508,000, and that the
As cost of collection will be $60,000. matter of fact I believe that these figures are very conservative, but even taking your figures, that would mean that we have to get a net revenue of $508,000 from these new import duties to which we all object and which the Council reluctantly passed because we realised that the money had to be raised and that revenue had to be made up from fresh This tax, even on your figures, sir, means that we have to pay very nearly a lakh and a half to military contribution. to the bogey Your Excellency referred of subsidiary coinage. I do not pro-
to pose go deeply into that question, which is a very vexed one, and as we know different opinions prevail. But I would remind your Excellency that when you appointed a Commission some time ago, the majority report was signed by five members, consisting of leading officials and merchants in the Colony. That majority report was signed amongst others by the Chinese member sitting opposite. One member, the head of a Bank, signed an in- dividual report, and three members signed a minority report. I would remind your Excel- lency that the committee of the Chamber of Commerce, after discussing the matter very carefully, endorsed the minority re- port signed by Messrs. Smith, Law and Wood. I merely refer to this question to remind you how very difficult it is to arrive at any decision on such a vexed question, because you find out of a dozen men collected together perhaps not
than three agree one point. The policy at present and hitherto adopted by the Government is per- fectly correct-one of watchful care. At any moment the situation may change and the Government may have, sooner than we anticipate, to take drastic steps to deal with it. For myself I believe our coin is not redundant. I believe that, in the interests of the Colony, it would be a mistake to redeem our subsidiary coins and re-sell at melting value, as it would be a loss of about a quarter or half a million dollars a to the Colony. I also believe it would be a mistake to try to prevent the circulation of Chinese coin in the Colony. Those are my personal views, but I know a large number of of people do not agree with me. There is only one other matter mentioned in your Excellency's remarks to which I shall refer, and that is the erection of lights at Douglas rock and the Bunansiah reef. This question is an old one. It has been before the Chamber of Commerce, and was referred by us to the Government on more than one occasion. The consensus of opinion as given by men, some of whom have spent half a lifetime in navigating the Canton'
on
more
year
anyone,
a
"the hon-
[October 25, 1909.
may
suffer.
be
in
without such friction. And the interests of Hong kong being so interlaced with those of Canton any act likely to involve dissension between the two communities is to be deprecated. The remedy I advocate now is to have a new coinage redeem- able at par.
To effect this reform it would be necessary that new coins be struck which should be of exactly the same weight and fineness as the old, but with a different superscription.
old coins
to would then need The demonetised, and it is perhaps upon this point, alone that any disagreement with my proposal may arise. The profit on minting should be kept in reserve, not as former years passed to revenue, but the interest on reserve might properly be appropriated as revenue. The demonetisation of the old coins need not, I think, trouble the conscience of Government, because the operation would cause the community no more loss than they have already suffered; and in any case the Govern- ment, if it felt morally bound to redeem, would only require to do so in regard to those actually in the Colony; for as regards the millions of them in China the Hongkong Government has no responsibility, moral or otherwise. They were sold as a commodity just us a merchant sells his wares, and the Government never having by promise, implied or otherwise, undertaken to redeem them is no more under an obligation to do so than a merchant is under an obligation to receive back merchandise, which has fallen in value since he sold it. This, sir, is the proposal which I think will meet the difficulty, and if Government act upon the idea they will have done its duty by providing a healthy currency which it will be within every man's option to use; whilst those who elect to continue using the old coins will have no one but themselves to blame for any loss they
Hon. Mr. GRESSON-Your Excellency, it appears to me on going through the figures shown on page 19, which show an estimate of expenditure over revenue of $42,700 odd, that these are not actual. If you will refer to will the item Miscellaneous Services you see that the actual expenditure in 1908 was $374,000, and the approved estimate for 1909 $197,000, and the revised estimate for the same year $307,000. The estimate for $144,000, so that the difference between the revised estimate of 1909 and 1910 is there- fore $163,000. I have already made some inquiries as to these figures. I do not know that they are entirely satisfactory, and in dealing with these two columns it seems to me that you run a very good risk of running out your not small debit balance of $42,000, to a debit balance of $200,000. I would also like to refer to the total increase of expenditure, which shows on these figures a dif- ference of $518,626, to which must be added items of interest on the railway, which, for the future, I understand go to the capital of the railway. A sum of $276,000 odd was provided for that in 1909. In 1910 I under- stand it will be somewhat more. Taking the smallest, our expenditure has increased by $795,116. It is very easy to find, by analysing these columns, how these various items have been arrived at. There are very few, I am sorry to say, which show a decrease. Police and Fire Brigade showed in 1909 a special expendi- ture of $35,000, but for 1910 there is no special expenditure. Coming down to the Sanitary Department, we find that, after all the talk of saving, the total saving is only $12,000. Now we come down to what I consider
in most important figures.
this is the column-$374,000 for special land resump- tion. I understand that this land is to be used entirely for railway purposes, and your Excellency has quite rightly told us that it was proposed in future to debit the railway with that cost.
1910 is
Hon. Mr. OSBORNE-Your Excellency has informed us that the Government's policy on the question of subsidiary coinage is to be a policy of watchful inactivity."watchful care, ourable member who has just spoken calls it. And considering the complexity of the subject, the futile efforts of the Investigation Committee two years ago, when a number of experienced business men deliberated upon it and failed to agree on a single point, it is not surprising that, in the midst of such conflicting opinions, the Government hesitates to do otherwise than wait. At the same time I think your Excellency would welcome the prospect of escape from the dilemma in which the Colony finds itself, and I therefore venture to put forward a proposal which I think will, without injury to any interests and without friction, end a situation which is intolerable to trade. First, however, let me repudiate the idea that this is a question affecting only a few public traffic companies. Probably it affects these companies less than because they have it within their power to make good their losses by raising fares, as indeed has in most instances already It is not the company but the tra been done. veller who loses, except in so far as increased fares restrict traffic. This, sir, is not a question of individual interests; it is one that concerns, in a greater or less degree, the whole of our labouring classes-classes whose interests it is the duty of Government to protect, if for no higher reason than that the prosperity of Hongkong depends so, largely upon their welfare. For the Colony needs a plentiful supply of labour, and whatever tends directly or indirectly to restrict the influx of labour tends proportionately to handicap us as against our rivals in trade at other ports. There are those who hold that this depreciated coinage does not affect the working classes; that even though the cost of food and shelter may have risen as a consequence, wages also have risen in sympathy. This I deny. I deny that the rickshaman, the chair-bearer, the coal and cargo coolie and the host of other daily paid workers, are earning more to-day than they did before this evil arose. On the other hand, it is an undeniable fact that a 10 cent piece to-day has not the purchasing power it had then. I will not, however, enter upon controversial matters, but confine myself to one broad aspect regarding which I think we can all agree. No amount of theoretical argument can undermine the principle that a stable currency is essential to the prosperity of an industrial community; no amount of sophistry can upset the fact that a 10 cent piece, which at all times is worth the tenth of a dollar, is a better medium of exchange than one whose value fluctuates daily. Therefore, I take it that however much we may disagree on matters of detail or upon side issues, we are unanimous in recognizing the value of a stable coin. And I assume that no one will claim that our pressent coins possess stability. As to a remedy, I suppose the one which every honourable man would like to see applied is | redemption-redemption at par. But however much we may yearn after virtue in the abstract, on this particular occasion it becomes impossible when the cost is taken into account. For there have been issued from time to time an aggregate of over 40 million dollars worth of small coins, silver and copper; though how much is now in existence as money it is impossible to say; and any scheme of redemption would Hon. Mr. STEWART--This is the great day for therefore require to anticipate an enormous loss riding hobby horses. First, I propose to ride one indeed anything up to four million dollars; which I regard with some justification as par- so that this solution passes beyond our reach. ticularly my mount. It is not to be judged Two years ago I advocated prohibition; and against the 16-hand war horses, Military rightly so, I think, because believe it could Contribution and Sub-Coin, old stagers that have been accomplished then without friction || have been trotted out here for decades with Canton. To-day I do not advocate pro- by successive riders. Mine is only a five year- hibition, because I think it cannot be accomplished old. Five years ago a controversy was started
|
But it seems to me that as this land
is required for railway purposes the amount should rightly go to railway capital account There seems no good reason to pay for this rail- way site out of the revenue.